WascoZooKeeper

Oh, and I don't recall seeing the proper documentation come through the office for a Llama Deployment Request.

You can substantiate this claim, correct? Please cite the source of your authority. Of all the cachers I know, not a single one is particularly interested in Facebook integration.

Mournful lament about how the sport of geocaching is being ruined by people who don't adhere to my particular standards. Gratuitous swipe at Jeremy and the lackey reviewers for selling out to commercialism instead of upholding the integrity of the game. Vague hint of geocide.

Sorry, I can only give this one a 5.5.

BrianSnat, you is da man.

Bump -- this is still occurring every week.

Bumpity bumpity bump . . . anyone at the Lily Pad looking at this?

http://www.geocaching.com/pocket/urquery.a...b8-020e51d43f3d In this post I reported that I was missing caches at both ends of the route. I just tried it again, and they're still missing.

Starting sometime after 4/9/2010, a PQ that I run weekly has been missing caches on each end of its route. Here are pictures of the PQ's route and the map with the results; the missing caches are in red. I've checked many of them and the ones I've checked are all still active. 4/9 was the last time those caches were returned by my PQ. I have a closeup of the north end of the island but just now when I tried to upload the image I got "The Image upload system is currently down for maintainence. Please try again later."

Until today, the "from" part of my 3/7/2010 log was just blank (should have said aminalguy). Tonight, I dropped it into my event cache and grabbed it back out, and now it has my event cache name in that log.

On the contrary, when I think about events, I'm in "calendar" mode. I'm more concerned about whether the dates are open on my calendar, and then I'll decide whether the particular event merits traveling whatever distance is involved. I realize some people may not have the liberty to travel extensive distances, even for extraordinary events. I think for most, however, they want to know where events fall chronologically more than geographically. In addition, listing them by distance would put events on the same date far apart in the listing, making it more difficult to identify possible conflicts or synergies. Events are unique in that the "time" element of them is crucial -- a day early or a day late, and you've missed it. Tupperware in the woods can be found whenever you wish to go hunt for it.

No more guidelines!!!! Anything goes!!!!! My "O'Hare International Airport Taxiway Series" is good to go!!!!!

I did a breakfast event some years ago with 26 caches that were not made available until the event. While it wasn't a "rally" such as you describe, the problem you run into is that everybody pretty much takes off to the few caches that are closest to the event, and then tend to move in the same direction(s) from there. So it's not uncommon to have 15 or 20 cachers all descending on the same spot at roughly the same time, with some arriving as others are leaving. Unless they were all in hard-surface areas, there would also be a significant social trail formed very quickly, which not only be a dead giveaway to the cache location, but would also be ecologically damaging. Would be a fun idea if you can figure out a way to make it work. Even if you did something to try to "force" people to hunt them in different sequences (so you scatter the searchers all over the area) you're still going to have many who are just out to find caches and not necessarily play your game.

One of our local cachers put it best: "Any fool can throw a pebble down a well that a thousand wise men cannot take out."

This thread needs a llama to llighten things up.

Hi, Hynr, The route is already public -- it's called "Whidbey Island" and has keywords "Whidbey" and "Fidalgo". The query settings are 500 caches, 5.1 miles, any type, any size -- nothing else is set. The one on Camano might be an outlier, but I think the others definitely should be included -- in any event, they were picked up by the same query just a couple weeks ago!

Same number of caches was missed again today; I spot-checked a few and they were missed both last week and this week, so I'm guessing it's the same ones being missed each time.

This seems to be acting up again. The exact same query that was fine for the past few weeks is now missing some caches: Code,Lon,Lat GC1MEH7,-122.461,48.0252 GC1MA3T,-122.545883,47.967367 GCKT61,-122.409933,48.015 GCQK2C,-122.490783,48.12125 GCF86,-122.491583,48.12325 GC1MQCK,-122.444717,47.939233 GCW843,-122.37335,47.99935 GC1NT4Q,-122.401667,47.915 GCKX2E,-122.382033,47.9115 GC1MG9H,-122.37595,47.913517 GC1N07T,-122.735717,48.2212 GC1XECV,-122.67425,48.4301 GCKBJK,-122.673467,48.43275 GCP10M,-122.613183,48.460883 GCQF6Z,-122.6221,48.470283 GC1W5YQ,-122.65235,48.46745 GCK0RM,-122.585983,48.480983 GC19KK7,-122.66405,48.483083 GC1VCTF,-122.613,48.5057 GC1D19X,-122.658083,48.502667 GCRPZF,-122.67,48.50135 GC1VB2K,-122.627167,48.507583 GC1BQKK,-122.678267,48.505 GC1Z008,-122.638983,48.510983 GCZ1QF,-122.632767,48.51445 GCRG5B,-122.623833,48.518 GCTZR7,-122.624167,48.523333 I spot-checked a few and they were still active; it's possible that there may be some in this list that have actually been archived, though, since I didn't check them all. These are about 10% of the caches that the query should be returning.

Thanks to OpinioNate and David for fine work on this! Sounds pretty consistent with what we observed, since it looks like for almost every cache that was accepted, one would be skipped over. Thanks to the others (Hynr, et al.) who also provided test cases and their own analysis. Now I just have to get back out to Whidbey so I can put this to use. Unfortunately, school is going to get in the way this term.

The results on my query look much better. I still had 30 or so caches that I had a record of from PQs earlier this year that did not appear in the current results. Of these, about 6 or 8 were on the fringes of the area covered by my older query. Since I had created a new query in the course of reporting this problem, it's not a surprise that there might be a few caches picked up by my old PQ that were not picked up by the new one. So these aren't really a problem. There are about 24 more, though, that are in the area of my current PQ, that still aren't getting picked up. All except one of these are in "temporarily disabled" status. Since I'm not excluding "temporarily disabled" from my PQ, I should still be getting those -- is there something in the CAAR process that is suppressing disabled caches from the result even if I've asked for them? And the one exception in the previous paragraph is Earthcache GC1E057 -- it's active, and it's within my PQ coverage area, but it wasn't returned by the PQ. All in all, it's MUCH better. I'd still be interested in the remaining issues, though. And, without revealing corporate secrets, are you able to share any of what was discovered that was causing the problems?

Titanium Members of gc.com already have that feature.

Talk about the kindness of strangers!!! THREE different people, who I've never even heard of, have given me Groundspeak gift certificates recently!! My premium membership is good through 2013 now -- how wonderful! This must be one of those "random acts of kindness" things.

Could we have it highlight the actual location of the hide, too? I mean, not just the coordinates -- but like an x-ray vision thing that would let you see that the bison tube is in the fake pinecone on the third branch from the ground. That'd be cool.

I'm with Stunod on this one. I'm aware of situations in which the audit log information has been used to seriously harass cachers who did nothing more than look at a cache page. And I'm talking about physical threats, not just taunting or name-calling.

If it matters I used a 4 mile radius on the PQ. Wider and it will start to pickup Marrowstone Island and a lot more of Camino Island. Jim I'm trying to do a route with a 2-mile radius that zig-zags more without doubling back on itself. However, when I try to save it frequently and then make more modifications to tweak it, it seems to lose some of the earlier modifications.